The world's natural capital is expected to decline due to climate change, resulting in a 9% loss of ecosystem services by 2100, according to a study conducted by scientists at the University of California at Davis and the Scripps Institute of Oceanography at the University of California ( USA) and published in the journal “Nature”.
Breathable air, clean water, healthy forests and biodiversity contribute to human well-being in ways that are very difficult to quantify. “natural capital” It is the concept that scientists, economists and policymakers use to represent the current and future flow of benefits that the planet's natural resources provide to people.
“The big question is what do we lose when we lose an ecosystem,” says lead author Bernardo Bastien-Olvera, a graduate student at UC Davis when the study was conducted and currently a postdoctoral fellow at Scripps. To turn the question around: What do we gain if we can limit climate change and avoid some of its impacts on natural systems? This study helps us better consider harms that are not normally considered. “It also reveals an overlooked but surprising dimension of climate change’s impact on natural systems: its ability to exacerbate global economic inequality.”
“Natural capital” is the concept scientists, economists, and policymakers use to represent the current and future benefits that the planet’s natural resources provide to people.
When countries lose natural capital, their economies suffer. The study concluded that climate change-induced changes in vegetation, rainfall patterns and increasing CO₂ emissions will lead to an average decline in gross domestic product or GDP of 1.3% in all analyzed countries by 2100. Furthermore, significant inequalities in the distribution of these impacts have been identified.
“According to our research, the poorest 50% of countries and regions in the world are expected to bear a staggering 90% of the GDP damage,” adds Bastien-Olvera. “In stark contrast.”“The losses for the richest 10% could be limited to just 2%.”
According to the authors, this is primarily because low-income countries tend to rely more heavily on natural resources for their economic production and a larger share of their wealth is in the form of natural capital.
For the study, the authors used global vegetation models, climate models and World Bank estimates of the value of natural capital to estimate the impacts of climate change on countries' ecosystem services, economic production and natural capital stocks.
These estimates may be conservative because the analysis only considered terrestrial systems, mainly forests and grasslands. Bastien-Olvera plans it Address impacts on marine ecosystems in future research. Disturbances such as forest fires or tree death caused by insects were also not taken into account in the study.
By the year 2100, climate change-related changes in vegetation, precipitation patterns and increasing CO₂ emissions will lead to an average decline in gross domestic product or GDP of 1.3% in all analyzed countries.
The overall results underscore the importance of creating climate policies that take into account the unique values that each country derives from its natural systems.
“With this study, we integrate natural systems and human well-being into an economic framework,” said Frances C. Moore, lead author and associate professor in the Department of Environmental Science and Policy at UC Davis. “Our economy and well-being depend on these systems, and we should recognize and consider these overlooked harms when considering the costs of a changing climate.
“Thanks to the efforts of this research team, we now know this Damage to ecosystems affects human well-being in measurable and vastly disproportionate ways across populations. –says Jeffrey Mantz, NSF program manager–. The results will be fundamental to reducing economic losses in the coming decades.”